Displaying 1 - 20 of 35 results
Buckley v. Valeo is a January 30, 1976 Supreme Court case that struck down key pieces of Congress’ post-Watergate money in politics reforms, and set the structure of modern campaign finance law.
Spoiler alert: they do not. Rules work in corporations favor and against workers.
How 27 states, counties, and municipalities empower small donors and curb the power of big money in politics
McCutcheon struck down the limit on the total amount that one wealthy donor is permitted to contribute to all federal candidates, parties, and political action committees (PACs) combined.
Judge Kavanaugh's record raises serious concerns that he would expand the power of big money in politics, weaken voter protections, and insulate the president from the rule of law.
The Supreme Court got it supremely wrong when it held that corporations had the same rights as people to spend money in elections.
How the dominance of politics by the affluent & business undermines economic mobility in America
Public financing of elections, as a state and local democracy reform, can help enhance the political voice and power of working-class people and people of color. It is an effective antidote to the outsized influence corporations and major donors currently have on both politics and policy.
Why we need an executive order requiring government contractors to disclose their political spending.
In 2012, just 61 large donors to Super PACs giving an average of $4.7 million each matched the $285.2 million in grassroots contributions from more than 1,425,500 small donors to the major party presidential candidates.
Outside spending organizations reported $1.11 billion in spending to the FEC through the final reporting deadline in the 2012 cycle. That’s already a 200% increase over total 2008 outside spending.
Americans of all political backgrounds agree: there is way too much corporate money in politics.
This memo outlines how the Justices lined up on the issues in Randall v. Sorrell, provides some analysis of the opinions, and touches on the implications for future reform efforts.
After getting the First Amendment supremely wrong in Citizens United, the Supreme Court now faces its next money in politics case. In McCutcheon v. FEC, the challengers are attacking a law that says that no one person can contribute over $123,000 directly to federal candidates, parties, and committees—that’s over twice the average American’s income.
The Government By the People Act increases the power of the small contributions that ordinary citizens can afford to give, providing incentives for congressional candidates to reach out to average constituents, not just dial for dollars from wealthy donors.
Who is spending big money on elections, and what do they want?
How America’s Big-Box Retailers Turn Their Economic Power into Political Influence
In August 2011, Congress passed a strange piece of legislation intended to bind itself into the future. In spite of persistently high unemployment and an unremarkable deficit-to-GDP ratio, and in spite of public polling that consistently showed that creating jobs was the American public’s top priority, politicians inside the infamous Washington “Beltway” had spent months locked in a debate over ways to cut deficits and balance the federal budget—policies that would not create jobs and by some estimates would put millions out of work.
This report offers a comprehensive analysis of the fundraising and spending in federal races in the 2012 elections.
Super PACs have fast become a favored tool for wealthy individuals and interests to drown out the voices of average citizens.